dats82

I would like to play. I played once in my life, and the ball got off the ground twice in nine holes. Once to go across the road in someone's front yard, and the second time to take a dip in the lake. Needless to say, I am not a natural, but I could see it being an enjoyable game if you did not get too serious about it.

At the end he says, if you point a gun at an officer, you're gonna get shot. That is pretty ####ty if the officers don't even identify themselves as such. There certainly needs to be some repercussions from this. How can you bang on someone's door, not identify yourself as an officer, and then shoot the guy who anwers the door with a gun.

I've been told it feels like a mule kicked you in the nuts. I hope yours feels better than that. Good luck to you.

I am sorry to hear this. My sister attempted suicide, and it completely changed my thoughts about suicide and depression. I do not know this guy's situation, and you never really know what people are struggling with, but I think it is heart breaking that people get to the point where they believe this to be the only way out. For those who think they should "just let him go," I would suspect you have never had a loved one who has either attempted or committed suicide, or if you have, I guess you are just that cold hearted. Regardless, aside from the devastating effects on the family, surveys from mental health providers consistently reveal that people, who have had a failed attempt and received treatment, are grateful that they survived. I cannot remember the latest numbers I have heard, but it is something on the order of greater than 90%. The survival and treatment of these patients is not just based on a physician's obligation or a family's selfishness. Alright, I'm off my soap box.

That video is pretty dang funny. Good job, sir!

Like taking can.. uh, jewelry from a baby.

I like their speedy get away. I think the clerk could have just opened his door and drag his ass out while waiting on traffic

Why are you wearing a paintball mask? Or maybe it just looks like it.

It is my understanding that TN law views a loaded removable magazine as a loaded weapon. It is kinda splitting hairs, and I would think you would have to have a real di(k of a cop to charge you. Conceivably, though, even if you had the firearm and ammo seperated but the ammo was in a drop out mag, you still legally have a loaded weapon. I only bring this up for the interest of those without a permit transporting arms.

I would imagine that in the 357/38 revolvers, you could not really go wrong with either of the top three; Ruger, Smith, and Colt. However, once you start making custom large bore revolvers, there is a reason people use a Ruger. Correct my if I am wrong, but isn't that picture that surfaces every few years talking about cheap ammo, a picture of a Smith 44mag? I am certainly no revolver expert, but my thoughts are that if you are going to buy a large revolver, then you are not really worried about weight. If that is indeed true, why not get the one that is a little thicker and a little stronger just in case?

Is she even legal yet?

Amazing!

I got a letter in the mail today that came in one of those flat rate envelopes. It says it is from the, "United States Dept of Commerce, Economics Statistics Administration, U.S. Census Bureau." Basically, it states they are going to call me to conduct a survey to gather information for the "American Time Use Survey." Has anyone else received such a letter or had a phone call to do such a survey? I am just curious. I suspect I'll be busy when they call. They misspelled my name, so they are probably not really gathering "essential information" as they have stated.

Well, I understand the open sucks a little more in the short run, but at least you have less of a chance of having to do it twice. Just treat it right, and don't risk doing something you are advised against like lifting or doing too mych too soon.

That is funny. I have never thought of that. Back to the OP, the recovery period after a hernia repair depends greatly on how it is done. Do you know if it will be an "open" or "laparoscopic" repair? For a lap repair, many people will have them done on a Thursday or Friday and be back at work on Monday, provided their job does not require lifting and straining. The open repairs will put you down a little longer, like on the order of a week or more. The trade off is that the open repair generally has less risk of recurrence. You will be on lifting restrictions for a while with either repair. Either way, good luck to you, and I wish you a speedy recovery.

Those that carry in your back pocket, is there any concern with fatigue of the composite gun from sitting on it anything? I have no experience with that, but I have had a few composite knives that eventually cracked from being in the back pocket.

I agree. Most docs could give a damn if you have guns. The docs I know would be more inclined to ask about them just to talk shop and maybe go shooting or something. I agree that it is poor practice to interject personal beliefs in a professional setting, but only because you will probably have a poor business impact. If a doc's practice can take that hit and it is his prerogative, then he can rock on with it.

I guess I am viewing this perhaps from a more utilitarian view. I am not sure that is exactly the correct term, but if you look at the whole interaction. A patient seeks care from a doctor. The doctor disagrees with patient's practice (whatever it may be). The physician swallows his beliefs to treat the patient. So now, in the whole scenario, there has been a violation of the beliefs or morals or whatever of one person. Same patient seeks care from the same physician. Doctors says I don't feel comfortable treating you (for whatever reason, no matter how irrational), perhaps you should see Dr. X. Pt goes to other doc, receives the same level of care, and all is good. No one had to violate their beliefs or morals or whatever. Which scenario is more ethical for all involved?

I don't shoot my AR much, and when I do, it is never more than about 20-40 rds. It doesn't get cleaned everytime that happens. Maybe I clean it every 200 rds or so. I will usually run bore snake through it after shooting, but I don't really consider that cleaning. My .22s, on the other hand, pretty much just get cleaned when they start having trouble with bulk ammo. Who knows when that is. Any gun I carry or rely on for protection gets cleaned after shooting or every month or so if it is a carry gun. This is more so to keep the pocket fuzz and junk from potentially causing problems.

You still have not said why this is wrong. Why is it wrong for person a running their own business to make a decision on who they serve and who they don't serve regardless of what that decision is based on? Is it wrong or unethical for a donut shop to say they will only serve cops or more realistically that they get free services? Is it unethical for a restaurant to be posted, and if so, is it equally unethical to require you to be carrying while dinning? What makes it right to force a person, running their own business, to serve every person who walks in the door? Just for the record, I too think it is poor practice and unreasonable. However, just because you do not agree with something, that does not make it inherently wrong or unethical. If this were the only care a person could receive or there were no other doctors to see or in the case of an emergency, then absolutely, I would agree that it is unethical because you are then denying a person access to care. Otherwise, you have not denied anything but your service, and the patient is still free to receive care elsewhere.

That's what I was wondering. What caused it to get banned? Didn't they say it turned the weapon into an AOW or something like that?

I was looking for some numbers like that the other day, can you provide a link to that?

Actually, depending on the circumstances, it is their job. The laws vary slightly by state, but basically, it is mandatory for a physcian to report a GSW. I'm just messing with you; I'm sure you already knew that. I guess what I still don't understand about it all is what is the big deal about someone knowing you have guns? Like I said before, if we are trying to hide that we have guns or we don't want people know that we have guns, why are we on a gun forum talking about? I understand what everyone is saying about activism, but does anyone have any personal experience with a doctor refusing care based on questioning regarding firearms? I know that one story gives a case as an example, and I agree it is stupid. I am certainly not saying the doc is rational in such action, but I do not think he is wrong or unethical either. To me, it would be just the same as a restuarant not wanting to serve one group or the other (i.e. if they are posted). Who really gives a damn? It's this man's decision, poor as it may be, to not offer his services to whom ever he chooses. Just like the posted restuarants, if you don't agree, then don't support the business. It seems like people are making this a big deal just bacause it involves medical professionals. If that makes it a big deal, I guess that is what I am missing.

Supporting access to care is not synonymous with the doctor has to provide care to all. This is probably going to open a whole new can of worms, but it is the first example that comes to mind. Many doctors refuse to perform abortions. Is that to say they are denying that person access to that procedure? No, they are just simply not going to be the ones to do it. The "ethical" course of action in such cases is to say, "I do not provide (service x); however, I will refer you to another physcian who may better provide that care for you."

If it is activism, so be it. Docs are human and citizens of this country, as are you and I. They are free to be activist and have political or religious positions, and are free to choose how to live their lives, personal or professional, based on that. It is a choice as to which doctor you use, just as it is your choice which friends to have or which church to attend. This is taken straight from the AMA website, regarding principles of medical ethics. Principles of medical ethics I. A physician shall be dedicated to providing competent medical care, with compassion and respect for human dignity and rights. II. A physician shall uphold the standards of professionalism, be honest in all professional interactions, and strive to report physicians deficient in character or competence, or engaging in fraud or deception, to appropriate entities. III. A physician shall respect the law and also recognize a responsibility to seek changes in those requirements which are contrary to the best interests of the patient. IV. A physician shall respect the rights of patients, colleagues, and other health professionals, and shall safeguard patient confidences and privacy within the constraints of the law. V. A physician shall continue to study, apply, and advance scientific knowledge, maintain a commitment to medical education, make relevant information available to patients, colleagues, and the public, obtain consultation, and use the talents of other health professionals when indicated. VI. A physician shall, in the provision of appropriate patient care, except in emergencies, be free to choose whom to serve, with whom to associate, and the environment in which to provide medical care. VII. A physician shall recognize a responsibility to participate in activities contributing to the improvement of the community and the betterment of public health. VIII. A physician shall, while caring for a patient, regard responsibility to the patient as paramount. IX. A physician shall support access to medical care for all people.